SHREE TANOT AND GHANTIYALI MANDIR,JAISALMER vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 241/JODH/2025Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur07 August 2026AY 2024-253 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee was denied a personal hearing and proper consideration of their reply. Therefore, the impugned order was set aside to allow for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Shree Tanot and Ghantiyali Mandir, applied for approval under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(E) rejected the application on grounds of religious trust ineligibility and excess religious expenses.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) properly considered the assessee's reply and granted a personal hearing before rejecting the Section 80G application.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G(5),Section 80G(5B)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR

For Appellant: Ms. Shivani Bansal, CIT-DR (Physical)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 241/Jodh/2025 (Assessment Year – 2024-25) Shree Tanot and Ghantiyali CIT Exemption Mandir Jaipur 62 BN BSF Ramgarh-345022 PAN No. AAGAS 4409 N Assessee by None Ms. Shivani Bansal, CIT-DR (Physical) Revenue by Date of Hearing 05 / 08 / 2026. Date of Pronouncement 07 / 08 / 2026. ORDER PER: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, V.P.: This is an appeal by the assessee challenging order dated 27.12.2024 passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax Exemption, Jaipur rejecting assessee’s application seeking approval u/s 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

2.

We have considered rival submissions and perused the materials on record. As could be seen from the impugned order of Ld. CIT(E), the application seeking approval u/s 80G was rejected on two grounds, firstly, religious trust are not eligible u/s 80G(5), secondly, religious expenses are more than 5% which is in violation of Section 80G(5B). Before us, referring to ground no. 4, Ld. Authorised

2 ITA No. 241/Jodh/2025 Asst. Year: 2024-25 representative of the assessee submitted that without properly considering the reply furnished by the assessee and without granting a personal hearing to the assessee for explaining the nature of activities and expenses, the CIT(E) has rejected the application. Thus, he requested for restoring the matter back to him for de novo adjudication.

3.

Ld. Departmental representative has no objection for restoration of the issue.

4.

Looking at the limited prayer of the assessee for restoration of the issue on the ground that he was denied a personal hearing before the rejection order was passed, we are inclined to set aside the impugned order of Ld. CIT(E) and restore the matter back to him for fresh adjudication after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

5.

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 07/08/2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR) (SAKTIJIT DEY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT Dated : 07/08/2026.

3 ITA No. 241/Jodh/2025 Asst. Year: 2024-25 Nimisha, Sr. PS True Copy Copies to : (1) The appellant. (2) The respondent. (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File BY ORDER,

More judgments on Section 80G(5)

All 2,236 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G(5) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →